U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  OF  AGRICULTURE, 

OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS, 

A.  C.  TRUE,  Director. 


F.  H.  HALL. 

Editor  and  Librarian ,  New  York  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 


[Reprint  from  Annual  Report  of  the  Office  of  Experiment  Stations  for 
the  year  ended  June  30,  1902.] 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


LIBRARY 

BOOK  CLASS 

*50. \  A 


VOLUME 


ZjO  A\0  5"  rtc^-r^w. 


“POPULAR”  EDITIONS  OF  STATION  BULLETINS. 

By  F.  H.  Hall, 

Editor  and  Librarian.,  New  York  Agricultural  Experiment  Station. 

In  the  act  of  Congress  giving  national  support  to  the  experiment 
station  movement  the  acquirement  and  diffusion  of  information  is 
the  ffrst-mentioned  of  two  coordinate  lines  of  station  activity.  The 
idea  in  the  word  “acquiring”  of  the  act  is  to  some  extent  modi¬ 
fied,  or  explained  in  the  clause  stating  the  second  object  of  the 
establishment  of  stations— 44  to  promote  scientific  investigation  and 
experiment  ” — and  in  section  2,  which  specifies  some  of  the  lines  along 
which  research  efforts  may  be  directed;  but  beyond  providing  that 
annual  reports  and  quarterly  bulletins  of  progress  shall  be  issued, 
Congress  has  placed  no  limitations  upon  methods  of  4 4 diffusing” 
the  information  secured.  Certain  specifications  are,  indeed,  laid  down 
as  to  subject-matter  for  the  annual  reports,  but  the  stations  are  left 
without  restriction  as  to  form,  size,  subject-matter,  and  manner  of 
treatment  of  bulletins. 

This  omission  to  order,  to  recommend,  or  to  forbid  any  particular 
form  or  st}de  of  announcing  results  is  in  accord  with  the  general  tenor 
of  the  Hatch  Act  along  other  lines;  for  it  was  the  intention  of  Con¬ 
gress  to  give  the  greatest  liberty  in  matters  of  detail  to  the  States 
and  to  the  stations  they  might  establish.  It  was  not,  assuredly,  the 
purpose,  in  passing  thus  lightly  over  this  phase  of  station  work,  to 
minimize  its  importance. 

The  principal  means  of  communication  between  a  station  and  its 
constituents  must  be  the  printed  page,  though  there  are  other  subor¬ 
dinate  channels  which  serve  valuable  purposes.  Personal  interviews 
with  members  of  the  staff  at  the  station  or  elsewhere  must  be  com¬ 
paratively  rare,  and  station  correspondence  can  reach  only  scattered 
individuals,  though  the  information  imparted  through  these  channels 
can  be  given  a  pertinency  and  a  fitness  for  the  personal  needs  of  the 
seekers  after  knowledge  which  it  does  not  have  when  embodied  in  a 
pamphlet  written  to  cover  conditions  of  more  or  less  general  preva¬ 
lence.  The  extension  of  these  two  methods  of  communication  by 
answering  letters  through  the  columns  of  newspapers,  by  contributing 
to  the  press  more  formal  articles  relating  to  station  work,  and  by 
addressing  considerable  numbers  of  farmers  at  institutes  and  similar 

S.  Doc.  104 - 31 


,1.3725 


481 


482 


REPORT  OF  OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS. 


gatherings  increases  the  number  of  those  benefited.  But  these  meth¬ 
ods  are  not  capable  of  indefinite  expansion  and  are  subject  to  many 
objections  as  primary  agencies  for  distributing  information  relat¬ 
ing  to  experimental  investigation.  There  are  undoubtedly  stations, 
especially  in  States  where  scientific  agriculture  is  in  its  infancy, 
which  depend  upon  these  informal  methods  of  communicating  with 
their  constituents  more  than  upon  bulletins  and  reports;  but  it  is  to 
be  questioned  whether  such  stations  are  not  doing  work  which  belongs 
more  properly  to  the  agricultural  college,  to  the  neglect  of  their  own 
peculiar  held — investigation.  Extensive  correspondence  with  indi¬ 
viduals  or  through  the  newspapers  and  frequent  trips  over  the  area  of 
country  to  impart  instruction  prove  very  great  detriments  to  careful, 
consecutive  scientific  experimentation,  and  the  executives  of  many 
stations,  who  feel  that  the  supreme  usefulness  of  such  institutions  lies 
in  their  investigations,  do  not  make  special  effort  to  encourage,  though 
they  do  not  discourage,  correspondence  and  trips  to  meet  and  aid  the 
individual  farmer. 

For  these  stations,  and  to  a  great  extent  for  all  stations,  the  chief 
dependence  in  reaching  the  farmers,  fruit  growers,  feeders,  and 
breeders  who  look  to  them  for  advice  and  guidance  must  be  some  form 
of  printed  matter  distributed  through  the  mails;  in  other  words,  the 
reports  and  bulletins  mentioned  in  the  Hatch  Act.  Since  these  pub¬ 
lications  now  announce  net  results  from  the  annual  expenditure  of  one 
and  one-fourth  million  dollars  and  should  ultimately  convey  “useful 
and  practical  information”  to  more  than  live  and  one-half  million 
farmers,  the}T  deserve  most  careful  study  in  order  to  secure  the  greatest 
effectiveness  at  the  least  outlay. 

There  are  now,  and  probably  always  will  be,  two  quite  divergent 
views  regarding  the  purpose  of  station  effort  and  the  best  aim  for  station 
publications,  and  the  methods  of  disseminating  information  most  useful 
to  stations  of  one  class  will  not  be  equally  applicable  to  those  of  another 
class.  That  is,  the  stations  which  seek,  first,  to  uplift  directly  the 
practice  of  the  many  badly  trained  or  routine  farmers  will  not  work 
along  the  same  lines  nor  adapt  their  publications  to  the  same  type  of 
readers  as  do  the  stations  which  direct  most  of  their  efforts  to  the 
solution  of  problems  involving  deep  research  for  basic  principles. 
For  stations  in  either  of  these  two  general  classes  a  perfectly  uniform 
system  of  publications  could  not  be  secured,  even  if  it  were  desirable, 
since  legislative  enactments  and  other  local  restrictions  upon  station 
executives  differ  greatly  in  the  different  States,  but  it  seems  unnec¬ 
essary  that  each  station  should  vary  from  almost  every  other,  as  is  the 
case  now,  in  the  character  of  the  matter  found  in  the  annual  report  or 
its  bulletins,  in  the  general  style  of  presentation  of  experimental  work, 
and  in  the  classes  of  publications  issued.  There  undoubtedly  can  be, 
and  probably  will  be,  developed  some  general  system  which,  varied 
in  minor  details  to  suit  particular  conditions,  will  be  found  more 


POPULAR  EDITIONS  OF  STATION  BULLETINS. 


48b 

effective  and  more  economical  than  any  other  for  the  many  stations 
which  do  work  of  similar  character  and  grade  and  appeal  to  constit¬ 
uencies  very  much  alike  in  mental  ability  and  equally  advanced  in 
agricultural  practice. 

A  brief  glance  at  the  publications  of  the  American  stations  will 
show  what  diversity  of  treatment  exists.  The  earlier  stations  in  this 
country  looked  to  the  stations  of  Germany  for  methods  of  dissemina¬ 
tion  of  results,  as  well  as  for  methods  of  work,  and  for  a  short  time 
patterned  after  them  in  this  respect  as  far  as  very  different  conditions 
would  allow.  Foreign  stations,  particularly  those  of  Germany,  make 
use,  to  a  great  extent,  of  periodicals  in  announcing  their  labors.  The 
Landwirtschaftliche  Zeitschrifte  of  the  German,  Austrian,  and  Swiss 
provinces,  the  Deutsche  Landwirtschaf tliche  Presse,  and  similar  papers 
serve  to  promulgate  popular  information,  while  the  Versuchs-Stationen, 
Landwirtschaftliche  Jahrbucher,  Journal  fur  Landwirtschaft,  and 
various  Centralblatter  and  Zeitungen  record  the  scientific  side  of  sta¬ 
tion  work  and  are  really  official  organs  of  single  stations  or  groups  of 
stations;  and  the  various  French  journals  and  bulletins  serve  a  similar 
purpose.  The  American  system  has  never  provided  for  such  official 
organs;  but  some  of  the  pre-Hatch  Act  stations  printed  and  sent  to 
editors  small  editions  of  their  bulletins  which  served  as  copy  for  such 
papers  as  cuffed  to  print  them,  and  in  a  few  cases  selected  one  paper 
with  which  arrangements  were  made  for  regular  publication.  To  this 
plan  of  newspaper  announcement  of  station  results  there  were,  and 
are,  many  objections;  and  when  the  Congressional  enactment  extended 
the  franking  privilege,  the  printing  of  bulletins  by  the  press  as  a  per¬ 
manent  feature  ceased.  Many  stations,  however,  still  avail  them¬ 
selves  of  newspapers  as  an  additional  agency  in  making  known  or 
enforcing  points  of  practical  importance  brought  out  by  experience 
or  planned  experiment.  “Press  bulletins,”  “Timely  topics,”  “Hints 
for  farmers,”  etc.,  appear  to  be  increasing  in  number  and  popularity 
and  indicate  a  trend  in  the  direction  of  wider  dissemination  of  the 
station  experience  in  simple  form,  a  movement  in  line  with  the  modi¬ 
fication  of  the  bulletins  to  be  discussed  later. 

The  Hatch  Act  requires  two  classes  of  publications;  and  many  of  the 
stations  coniine  themselves  to  the  minimum  of  kinds  and  also  to  the 
minimum  of  numbers;  others  issue  from  three  to  six  classes  of  publi¬ 
cations — bulletins,  special  bulletins,  press  bulletins,  meteorological 
bulletins,  technical  bulletins,  circulars,  spray  calendars,  newspaper 
notices — and  publish  from  five  to  twent}T  bulletins  a  year. 

The  annual  report  may  be  merely  a  leaflet  or  small  pamphlet  giving 
a  summary  of  financial  transactions  and  the  briefest  account  of  station 
progress  during  the  year.  It  may,  on  the  other  hand,  be  a  500-page 
volume  containing  the  bulletins  issued  during  the  }7ear,  extended  dis¬ 
cussion  of  work  along  practical  or  scientific  lines  which  have  not  been 
published  in  bulletin  form,  a  statement  showing  the  receipts  and 


484 


REPORT  OF  OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS. 


expenditures  down  to  the  smallest  item,  a  general  survey  of  station 
progress  and  policy  by  the  director,  and  full  reports  from  each  depart¬ 
ment  or  upon  each  line  pursued.  These  are  perhaps  the  extremes, 
while  every  gradation  between  the  two  types  is  or  has  been  used  by 
some  of  our  stations. 

The  bulletins  differ  in  as  marked  a  manner.  There  has  been  a  con¬ 
certed  attempt,  continued  for  several  years,  to  secure  uniformity  in 
height  and  width  so  that  the  collected  station  literature  might  be 
bound  in  similar  volumes;  and  reasonable  success  has  attended  these 
efforts,  but  along  other  lines  diversity  appears  to  be  the  key  word. 
A  bulletin  may  be  a  monograph  or  a  miscellany.  It  may  deal  exclu¬ 
sively  with  a  planned  experiment  to  ascertain  a  single  fact;  it  may  be 
merely  an  annotated  list  of  the  plants  of  some  region,  or  it  may  be  a 
manual  of  cattle  feeding  or  fruit  culture.  The  matter  may  be  written 
for  the  advanced  chemist  and  contain  10-syllabled  words  used  without 
explanation,  or  for  the  u book-shy ’'  feeder  to  whom  “ protein”  and 
“carbohydrates''  are  as  Greek.  The  pamphlet  may  be  printed  on  the 
flimsiest  of  wood  pulp  or  on  supercalendered  stock.  It  may  be  void 
of  illustrations,  crude  and  faulty  in  style,  even  glaringly  ungrammat¬ 
ical;  or  it  may  show  fine  half-tone  plates  and  correct  and  artistic  draw¬ 
ings,  and  be  a  model  of  correct,  clear,  and  forceful  English.  If 
written  in  popular  style  for  the  farmer,  the  scientist  may  have  to 
content  himself  with  inadequate  data,  or  he  may  find  in  the  annual 
report  a  full  and  accurate  presentation  of  the  same  work.  If  scien¬ 
tifically  full  in  its  first  treatment,  the  matter  may  be  preceded  by  a 
summary  in  more  simple  terms,  or  it  may  be  supplemented  by  an 
abridged  or  popular  edition  for  the  untrained  or  busy  reader.  A  few 
stations  attempt  a  separation  of  popular  or  practical  information,  and 
that  of  a  scientific  or  technical  character  by  issuing  bulletins  in  series 
separately  numbered;  while  others  make  no  distinction  in  numbering, 
but  distribute  bulletins  of  special  applicability  to  selected  sections  of 
their  mailing  lists.  In  other  cases  all  bulletins  are  sent  to  each  name 
upon  the  mailing  list,  leaving  it  to  the  recipient  to  neglect  them,  if 
the}'  are  technical  and  he  a  busy  farmer,  or  if  they  are  popular  and 
the  recipient  an  investigator  intent  upon  causes  and  principles  and  sat¬ 
isfied  only  with  full  and  logical  data. 

Possibly  conditions  justify  all  these  diverse  forms,  which  appear  to 
have  arisen  through  the  efforts  of  each  station,  acting  independently, 
to  develop  a  system  suited  to  its  needs.  The  writer  would  not  suggest 
for  any  station  a  radical  change  to  secure  uniformity;  yet  he  believes 
that  one  feature  of  the  system  now  in  use  at  the  New  York  Agricul¬ 
tural  Experiment  Station  is  well  worth  the  consideration  of  station 
executives.  By  the  introduction  of  this  feature  the  publications  of 
the  station  have  been  fitted  to  serve  better  both  farmer  and  scientist, 
with  a  lessening  of  expense  for  printing.  This  change  in  the  system 
of  bulletins  involves  printing  them  in  two  editions,  one  written  by  the 


POFULAR  EDITIONS  OF  STATION  BULLETINS. 


485 


experimenter,  with  a  discussion  of  the  work  in  detail,  giving  data  with 
fullness  and  scientific  accuracy;  while  in  the  other  edition  it  is  sought 
to  meet  the  needs  of  the  farmer  and  busy  man  by  a  short,  simply 
worded  outline  of  the  experiments  and  a  clear  presentation  of  the 
practical  bearing  of  the  facts  revealed  by  the  work. 

The  idea  of  double  publication  of  results  in  scientific  (unabridged) 
bulletins  and  popular  editions  originated  at  the  North  Carolina  Station, 
but  to  Dr.  Jordan,  the  director  of  the  Geneva  Station,  is  to  be  given 
the  credit  for  the  successful  development  of  the  system.  To  the  writer 
fell  the  duty  of  editorship  of  the  publications,  and  he  has  in  conse¬ 
quence  taken  a  deep  personal  interest  in  the  workings  of  the  system 
and  has  sought  in  various  ways  to  learn  to  what  extent  it  is  a  success 
or  failure.  Almost  without  exception  the  comments  which  have 
reached  us  have  been  favorable,  and  the  basal  idea  of  the  system  has 
been  already  adopted  by  some  stations  and  is  soon  to  be  used  by 
others.  The  few  adverse  criticisms  have  been  due  to  misconceptions 
of  the  plan  and  its  purpose  or  to  differences  of  opinion  as  to  the  style 
best  suited  to  the  popular  edition. 

The  farmers  of  the  State  seem  to  prefer  the  “popular”  edition, 
though  free  to  choose  either;  and  many  of  them  have  assured  the 
station  that  these  bulletins  are  much  more  generally  read  and  followed 
in  practice  than  was  the  case  when  one  edition  was  issued. .  Of  more 
than  36,000  persons  in  the  State  receiving  bulletins  from  this  station, 
less  than  900  (2£  per  cent)  have  requested  that  the  complete  bulletins 
be  sent  them  regularly.  Man}"  papers  also  have  spoken  well  of  the 
system,  and  in  numerous  instances  have  aided  to  spread  the  information 
sent  out  by  reprinting  the  popular  bulletins  in  full.  To  the  extent 
to  which  this  is  done  the  station  is  assured  of  correct  and  effective 
announcement  of  its  work,  while  the  ordinary  newspaper  abstract  of 
station  publications  is  often  misleading,  if  not  incorrect. 

The  system  would  probably  not  have  been  so  applicable  nor  so  well 
received  earlier  in  the  history  of  the  station,  nor  is  it  now  of  as  great 
value  to  stations  doing  “pioneer”  work  for  the  agriculture  of  their 
section.  The  earlier  stations,  certainly,  and  probably  every  station, 
to  a  considerable  extent,  found  it  necessary  to  teach  many  elementary 
truths  of  immediate  utility  which  could  be  brought  out  by  “practical” 
experiments  and  whose  application  to  farm  methods  would  work  great 
benefit  to  agriculture.  These  dealt  largely  with  details  of  practice, 
and  while  the  experiments  had  to  be  carried  out  with  more  care  than 
the  farmer  would  use  and  included  lines  of  inquiry  he  would  not 
think  of,  they  did  not,  in  most  cases,  involve  much  with  which  the 
ordinary  agriculturist  was  unfamiliar.  The  announcement  of  the 
results  could  be  given  in  detail  sufficient  for  the  purposes  of  fellow 
investigators,  yet  not  greatly  weary  the  farmer,  since  the  stations 
were  working  with  agencies  he  knew  well.  It  is  probable,  however, 
that  even  with  experiments  of  this  elementary  character  the  farmer 


486 


REPORT  OF  OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS. 


of  ten  or  twenty  years  ago  would  have  preferred  a  shorter  and  more 
familiar  account  to  the  long  treatises  he  sometimes  received. 

There  were  also  some  new  principles  relating  to  fertilizers  and  their 
application,  feeding  problems,  insecticides  and  fungicides,  bacteria  in 
dairying,  and  allied  topics,  in  which  the  tiller  of  the  soil  and  the 
feeder  must  be  instructed  and  which  they  must  be  led  to  use  by 
repeated  illustrative  experiments.  Bulletins  dealing  with  work  of 
this  character  were  written  for  the  farmer  alone  usually  and  not  for 
the  scientist,  and  it  was  necessary  in  them  to  write  at  length  and  with 
many  different  presentations  of  the  same  idea  in  order  that  the  read¬ 
ers  might  get  a  clear  and  comprehensive  view  of  the  new  truths  pre¬ 
sented.  The  proportion  of  such  bulletins  was  much  greater  during 
the  first  ten  years  of  general  station  activity  than  it  need  be  now, 
when  this  foundation  work  has  been  well  done  by  numerous  stations, 
and  when  the  principles  of  fertilizer  application,  feeding,  dairying, 
and  soil  treatment  are  understood  by  a  numerous  body  of  institute 
workers,  contributors  to  the  agricultural  press,  and  leading  farmers  in 
almost  every  community. 

Practical  experiments  are  still  needed;  many  of  them  and  careful 
ones  carried  through  such  long  periods  of  time  and  with  such  close 
checking  of  conditions  that  the  data  accumulated  will  be  of  scientific 
value  and  will  be  worth  study  by  experts,  both  to  be  certain  that  no 
errors  of  interpretation  have  led  to  false  conclusions  and  as  a  basis  for 
planning  work  along  similar  or  slightly^  divergent  lines.  The  farmer, 
however,  is  too  busy  a  man  in  this  hustling  age  to  be  willing,  if  able, 
to  give  attention  to  the  details  of  long  or  complex  experiments,  even 
in  fields  familiar  to  him.  Through  ten  or  fifteen  years  of  experience 
with  station  workers,  with  few  instances  of  incapacity  or  lack  of 
thoroughness  and  almost  none  of  dishonesty,  the  discriminating  farmer 
has  learned  to  trust  station  conclusions  and  does  not  ask  fullness  of 
detail  so  that  he  may  have  a  check  upon  the  experimenter.  In  our 
experience,  at  least,  he  prefers  the  concise,  simply  worded  outline  of 
the  experiments,  with  plainly  stated  practical  conclusions  and  careful 
directions  for  applying  to  his  own  work  the  truths  developed. 

Station  work  in  America  tends  now,  as  it  has  done  for  years  abroad, 
toward  deeper  studies  than  have  occupied  the  majority  of  workers  in 
the  past,  and  many  investigations  now  call  into  play  the  keenest  facul¬ 
ties  of  the  physiological  chemist,  the  bacteriologist,  the  plant  physi¬ 
ologist  and  pathologist,  the  entomologist,  the  biologist,  as  well  as  the 
trained  hand  and  e}Te  and  the  fund  of  experience  of  practical  handlers 
and  judges  of  the  processes  and  products  of  the  farm  and  garden. 
These  investigations  lead  into  realms  where  the  most  intelligent  farmer 
need  not  be  ashamed  to  confess  himself  lost,  vet  the  results  are  likely 
in  the  future,  as  they  have  in  some  cases  in  the  past,  to  revolutionize 
some  branch  of  agricultural  practice.  The  details  of  such  investiga¬ 
tions,  the  preliminary  discussions  which  prepare  the  ground  for  intel- 


POPULAR  EDITIONS  OF  STATION  BULLETINS. 


487 


ligent  understanding  of  the  work,  and  the  theories  proven  or  over¬ 
thrown  by  the  results  are  of  little  interest  to  the  practical  agricultur¬ 
ist.  He  can  not  read  understanding^  such  a  discussion  of  work  of 
this  character  as  would  satisfy  the  student,  and  he  can  not  be  blamed 
if  he  relegates  the  scientific  bulletin  to  his  file  unread  or  even  throws 
it  into  the  waste  basket  with  an  expression  of  dissatisfaction  at  the 
station  for  sending  it.  Yet  the  brief  story  of  the  investigation  put  in 
homety,  everyday  words,  with  an  indication  of  the  possibilities  of 
practical  benefit  from  the  work,  he  may  read  in  ten  minutes  and  find 
extremely  interesting  and  profitable.  If  he  chance  to  be  a  specialist 
along  the  line  covered  by  the  bulletin  and  desirous  of  studying  the 
question  further  the  full  details  are  accessible  in  the  regular  edition, 
and  this  the  expense  of  a  postal  card  will  secure  b}r  return  mail.  He 
need  not  wait  until  the  freshness  of  his  desire  has  lessened  or  the  lapse 
of  time  made  him  forget,  as  in  the  case  where  scientific  discussions  are 
given  only  in  the  annual  report  of  the  station. 

On  the  other  hand,  scientists  and  fellow-investigators,  if  interested 
at  all  in  an  experiment,  are  interested  in  the  details  and  in  the  discus¬ 
sion  of  theories  and  principles.  Data  should  be  placed  in  the  hands  of 
these  men  as  soon  as  practicable  and  with  the  fullness  of  detail  which 
the  experimenter  considers  desirable.  The  latter  should  not  be  ham¬ 
pered  for  space,  as  is  often  felt  to  be  necessary  when  large  editions  of 
bulletins  must  be  printed,  in  which  the  expense  of  a  few  additional 
pages  counts  up  rapidly.  Neither  should  the  author  be  compelled  to 
delay  publication,  both  since  credit  for  scientific  work  frequently 
depends  on  priority  of  announcement  and  since  the  facts  discovered, 
if  valuable  as  a  guide  in  further  investigation,  are  doubl}r  valuable  if 
soon  made  known.  The  long  dela}T  in  appearance  of  annual  reports 
which  have  to  pass  through  the  hands  of  State  printers  must  certainly 
be  exasperating  to  the  man  who  has  done  a  good  piece  of  work  and 
sees  weeks  and  months  pass  while  his  discovery  lies  buried  in  manu¬ 
script.  It  may  be  said  that  such  discoveries  should  be  announced  in 
scientific  periodicals  and  credit  thus  secured.  This  might  serve  were 
the  experimenters  alone  concerned;  but  unless  great  care  is  used,  both 
by  the  author  and  by  the  journal  in  which  he  publishes,  the  station 
does  not  receive  its  proper  share  of  the  credit  for  the  work.  Most 
stations  on  this  account  demand  that  members  of  their  experimental 
corps  announce  results  first  in  station  publications. 

Thus,  to  secure  effectiveness  for  two  very  diverse  classes  of  interested 
readers  and  to  insure  the  prompt  appearance  of  both  popular  and 
scientific  discussions  of  work  performed,  the  complete  and  summarized 
editions  have  advantages  over  other  forms  of  station  publications. 
This  double  publication  also  gives  a  stimulus  to  station  workers,  who 
as  a  rule  are  scientific  men,  in  the  opportunity  which  it  affords  of  pre¬ 
senting  the  result  of  their  researches  in  a  full  and  scientific  manner; 


488 


REPORT  OF  OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS. 


and  any  stimulus  to  scientific  enthusiasm  is  desirable.  Such  an  oppor¬ 
tunity  is  not  supplied  by  the  publication  that  is  a  compromise  between 
a  scientific  and  a  popular  presentation. 

It  is  probably  the  first  thought  of  those  to  whom  the  idea  is  new  that 
such  duplicate  discussion  of  results  means  a  great  increase  in  expense. 
The  contrary  is  true  so  far  as  printing  is  concerned,  for  the  setting  up 
of  type  for  the  popular  edition  is  a  very  small  item — the  saving  in 
paper,  presswork,  and  handling,  through  the  smaller  size  of  the  popu¬ 
lar  bulletins,  a  large  one  when  10,000  or  more  bulletins  are  printed. 
In  the  last  report  of  the  Office  of  Experiment  Stations  the  bulletins 
issued  by  the  stations  during  the  fiscal  year  are  listed.  The  total  num¬ 
ber  of  pages  contained  in  those  which,  from  their  titles,  appear  suit¬ 
able  for  publication  in  two  editions  is  7,400,  and  the  average  number 
of  names  on  the  mailing  lists  is  nearly  12,000.  To  print  7,400  pages 
of  matter  in  an  edition  of  12,000  at  50  cents  a  page  for  each  1,000 
copies,  which  is  a  fair  figure,  would  cost  $44,000.  If  complete  and 
popular  editions  were  printed,  it  would  probably  be  necessary  to  make 
the  editions  2,000  and  11,000,  respectively,  providing  1,000  copies  for 
duplication,  and  the  popular  edition,  at  the  ratio  which  exists  between 
the  two  editions  at  Geneva,  would  contain  2,100  pages.  The  2,000 
copies  of  the  complete  edition  would  cost  at  55  cents  a  page  per  1,000 
copies  (also  a  fair  figure  for  editions  of  this  size)  $8,140,  and  the 
12,000  copies  of  the  popular  edition  at  50  cents  a  page  per  1,000  would 
cost  $19,690,  which  makes  a  total  for  the  two  editions  of  a  little  more 
than  $27,800,  a  saving  over  the  cost  of  the  single  bulletin  of  $17,000. 

But  it  is  not  to  the  average  station,  and  especially  not  to  the  station 
publishing  the  mininum  number  of  the  bulletins  and  sending  them  to 
a  few  addresses,  that  the  system  is  particularly  applicable,  but  rather 
to  those  publishing  ten  or  more  bulletins  annually  and  having  mailing- 
lists  of  from  15,000  to  40,000  names.  For  the  station  publishing  10 
bulletins  of  30  pages  each  (which  is  about  the  average  size)  and  hav¬ 
ing  a  mailing  list  of  20,000  names,  the  yearly  saving  in  the  cost  of 


printing  would  be  $1,830,  as  follows: 

20,000  copies  of  300  pages  (10  bulletins  of  30  pages  each), 

at  50  cents  a  page  per  1,000  copies .  S3,  000 

2,400  copies  of  300  pages,  at  55  cents  a  page  per  1,000  copies.  $396 
18,000  copies  of  86  pages  (popular),  at  50  cents  a  page  per 
1,000  copies .  774 

Total .  1,170 

Difference .  1,  830 


The  figures  just  given  are  based  upon  the  ratio  derived  from  the 
comparison  of  the  number  of  pages  in  the  complete  bulletins  issued  at 
Geneva  and  the  popular  editions  of  the  same  bulletins,  but  this  ratio 
does  not  express  one  which  might  be  established  and  which  would 
decrease  the  expense  for  the  popular  bulletins  about  one-fifth,  since 
each  bulletin  issued  by  this  station,  whether  complete  or  popular, 


POPULAR  EDITIONS  OF  STATION  BULLETINS. 


489 


devotes  two  pages  to  cover  and  list  of  officers.  Many  stations  might 
consider  these  pages  unnecessary,  in  large  part  at  least,  for  popular 

bulletins. 

Against  the  saving  thus  shown  must  be  placed  the  cost  of  prepara¬ 
tion  and  proof  reading  of  the  extra  edition,  but  for  stations  publishing 
extensively,  at  least,  the  saving  will  provide  the  salary  of  an  addi¬ 
tional  member  of  the  staff,  to  combine  editorial  duties  with  some  other 
functions.  An  editor,  chosen  with  regard  to  his  fitness  for  such  work, 
can  assist  the  other  members  of  the  staff  materially  in  the  preparation 
of  manuscripts  for  the  regular  bulletins;  he  secures  uniformity  in  sta¬ 
tion  publications  and  insures  accuracy,  clearness,  and  force  in  the  pre¬ 
sentation  of  results;  he  relieves  the  experimenters  of  the  unfamiliar 
and,  to  many,  distasteful  work  of  the  proof  reading  and  of  the  weari¬ 
some  struggles  with  printers;  he  provides  for  correct  and  pleasing 
typography  and  satisfactory  handling  of  the  printed  matter,  and  in 
many  other  ways  may  be  of  great  value  in  keeping  the  publications  of 
the  station  up  to  the  mark  or  improving  them.  Such  work  frequently 
falls  upon  the  director,  but  much  of  it  is  of  a  routine  character  and 
hardly  worth  the  time  and  attention  of  so  highly  paid  an  officer. 

The  editor  would  also  write  the  popular  editions,  familiarizing  him¬ 
self  both  with  the  experimental  side  of  the  work  and  with  actual  prac¬ 
tice,  so  that  his  discussions  may  be  both  true  to  the  fact  and  applicable 
to  existing  conditions. 

Editorial  duties  will  not  occupy  all  the  time  of  one  man  at  any  of  our 
stations,  but  one  who  is  capable  of  doing  good  editorial  work  should 
also  be  a  valuable  assistant  in  many  other  directions.  Since  the 
saving  on  the  popular  bulletins  would  nearly  or  quite  pay  the  salary 
of  a  well-qualified  man,  his  services  in  other  directions  would  be  so 
much  gained  to  the  station,  either  in  direct  productive  effort  or  in 
economy  of  the  time  of  men  who  desire  to  devote  all  their  energies  to 
investigation. 

For  stations  publishing  but  few  bulletins,  of  course,  the  employ¬ 
ment  of  a  special  editor  is  not  feasible;  but  the  rewriting  of  the  results 
of  scientific  or  complex  experiments  into  shorter,  simpler  form  can  be 
satisfactory  done  by  the  author  of  each  bulletin,  by  some  member  of 
the  staff  who  shows  special  fitness  for  such  work,  or  even  by  some 
writer  for  the  press  who  is  familiar  with  agricultural  science  and 
agricultural  practice.  It  is  probable  that  by  any  of  these  methods 
some  financial  advantage  would  be  gained,  and  it  seems  certain  to  the 
writer  that  opportunity  afforded  for  careful  discussion  in  the  complete 
bulletin  would  be  appreciated  b}T  the  experimenter  and  his  scientific 
readers,  and  that  the  conciseness,  simplicity,  and  readableness  of 
the  popularized  bulletins  would  appeal  with  enough  greater  force 
to  the  farming  constituency  of  the  station  to  justify  the  rewriting  if 
the  cost  were  not  wholly  met  by  the  lessened  expense  of  printing. 


4 


; '  •  ' 

•,  €  .  . 


■V 

• 

. 

. 


* 


r  a  ^ 


